Sex, Power, and Julian Assange

I am absolutely appalled by the way in which sex is being used against Julian Assange. Oh, he used his body weight to hold a woman down whilst having sex with her? The cad!

“Use any man according to his desert, and none should ‘scape whipping”, Hamlet said. The two women are in all probability being covertly funded and encouraged, and perhaps coerced, to bring these charges against behavior of which many men, and some women, are guilty in intimate affairs. Mild coercion? Come ON, many couples use mild coercion and many plus size women are guilty of pinning their sweeties to the mat.

Sex without a condom while she is asleep? The Swedish prosecutor, probably before the full weight of the CIA (a Mr. Creosote and Fat Bastard indeed) was brought to bear down on her in the night, threw these ridiculous charges out. Had Assange been HIV positive, this could be a serious matter. But he isn’t, right?

Yes, it’s true that if she says “no” she often means “no” and a gentleman will desist when this is the case, for part of being a man of the world lies in knowing the difference. But there is also a right to privacy, and there are times in intimate affairs when “no” means “yes”. In millions of nights all ’round the world, such cases remain undecided and undecidable for the simple reason that women lack legal resources when truly coerced, and when not in truth coerced, take responsibility for their own actions.

Cf. Foucault. The ruling elite has one interest, and one interest only, in sex, for being part of it requires asexuality, whether in the form of hyper sexuality or an absent sexuality. This is the use of sex to control the rest of us at the deepest possible level, using licentiousness and Puritanism as needed.

The privacy of the women is being protected by law. This is as it should be, but it is also convenient to the forces encouraging, funding, and perhaps, as in the case of Monica Lewinsky ten years ago, coercing the women so as to bring Assange to trial, not for sexual crimes but for espionage.

Nobody, except Clinton himself (who was trying to protect two women, Hilary and Monica, when he failed to tell the truth) stood up for Monica Lewinsky in that scandal, where the Republicans were merely posing as defenders of women in a naked grab for power. Odds are the situation here is precisely the same. Odds are that as I write, the women are birds held in a gilded cage, perhaps with room service in a Stockholm hotel, bullied and interrogated daily. Odds are that they will be thrown to the wolves when Assange is safely back in the USA on trial for espionage, as was Lewinsky.

If Assange’s partly consensual behavior is criminalized, not of course to protect women who will continue to get a raw deal in our brutal society, but to nail him, then any sex act that starts with a woman who’s angry at you and a bit of mild coercion, that becomes laughter and then steamy passion, in short millions of such acts, is now rape. As Eddie Murphy would be the first to tell us, many, many sex acts start with a Mad (as in angry) Woman, and end in mutual satisfaction. Such is the way of the world which God made.

But to those hounding Assange, any element of coercion in a consensual sex act becomes, like the active ingredient in a homeopathic medicine, the property of the whole act. This is the coming of the Republic of Gilead, Margaret Atwood’s nightmare vision, in “The Handmaid’s Tale”, of how sex and politics can interact. It is Julia’s “Anti-Sex League” in Orwell’s 1984.

Well, as it is, sex is already used to control. My own sexuality, my being merely a man, was deliberately used against me in my former job. Because I am a man, and without knowing anything about me, a person who’s also left the firm made unfounded sex-related charges which I refuted. The sexuality and imagined proclivities of men, especially older men, is now fair game, and this is the sole reason for the charges against Assange.

I am let us say pinning a Mad Woman down and she is saying, “Edward! Stop!”

If she is a stranger (who somehow knows my name), I am guilty of rape.

If she is a girlfriend, even if I have like Assange a backup girlfriend, even if I have a girl in every city, I’m not if she’s giggling or changes her mind given my considerable charm, right?

If she’s a plus size the tables will get turned in a minute or two, right?

That is, more information would be needed: the words are not the thing. In the legal world, collecting this information costs money, as the Law and Economics boys would tell us. So, we either allow certain cases of real victimization to occur or else try a general Clampdown which will always target a certain class of people: here, men.

The campaign to silence women based on their sexuality which has lasted for thousands of years is merely generalized, today, to include non-powerful men such as Assange. It appears to me that his enemies within the USA’s intelligence community deliberately designed these ridiculous charges in hopes that feminism would converge with Puritanism into support for the USA’s world-views.


2 Responses to “Sex, Power, and Julian Assange”

  1. Went through this in divorce 26 years ago. Accused molesting 1 1/2 year old daughter, absolved, then year later same charge. Absolved again. She was obviously trained on an anatomical sex organ doll by mother and co-conspirators. I call this “psychological infanticide”. The damage done to my daughter now 27, was infinitely more damaging than mere “touching” if indeed that is what happened but I assure you it did not. Mother was the real molester. As far as Mr A is concerned I want a society that is democratic and completely transparent. That would be a world where secrets were unnecessary as would be espionage as everyone’s cards are on the table all the time.

  2. spinoza1111 Says:

    Sex-based accusations are the nuclear bomb of divorce and custody disputes. A strange little aphorism from Theodore Adorno is that “in sexual matters, the accuser is always wrong”. It echoes Christ’s sound byte: let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

    I think it means in Adorno’s case that no sex event takes place in a vacuum apart from the abuse of children, which should be prosecuted and is, but is also used to bear false witness even though when it is, the child is sexually abused by her “protector” who’s bringing the false charges.

    Federal prosecutors working actually for special investigator Ken Starr told Monica Lewinsky that if she and her innocent Mom did not conform to their “game plan”, they could “indict anyone or anything, even a ham sandwich”. The plan was to impeach Clinton. I’m fairly certain this is the same sort of strategy being used to try to silence Assange.

    Events between consenting adults have a great deal of context, and “consent” is as I’ve shown a difficult issue. A lot of women are in my personal view still lazy as hell, and want to be swept off their feet. I was certainly up for that when I was 20 but today, I’d really rather read The Cambridge History of Iran.

    The Puritan is as anyone who’s read Nathaniel Hawthorne (eg., hardly anyone) knows, a libertine raging to get out and play. The whole world is covered, today, with his vile filth as a result of American hegemony. But Puritan politics didn’t work with Monica Lewinsky, and they aren’t going to work, I rather hope, with Assange.

    It’s the death of the idea of the possibility of being “urbane”, and that’s a mouthful. What it means is the systematic deconstruction of the very idea that men as men can have projects and life plans that don’t necessarily include marriage and subservience to the projects and life plans of some woman.

    Take a look at “The Forty Year Old Virgin”. While it’s funny as hell, it portrays the projects of the FYOV in the start of the film as necessarily ridiculous and makes fun of him in precisely the same way as films in the early 1960s (the era of Mad Men) made fun of asexual “career girls” whose ambition was to teach typing in a business college.

    However, sex remains a threat, not only to the wretched of the earth but also to the lower middle class. It destroys lives, most often of women through unwanted pregnancy but also by making fathers of young men who haven’t had a chance to get an education or even marketable skills. They then have to figure out how to build those skills and get hired while saddled with a family.

    In my own case, I’d self-trained as a computer programmer by the time I married and became a father, but did so rather early (married at 25, father at 28). I entered graduate school in computer science while working full time with a nonworking wife.

    This involved driving from Schaumburg into the Loop, finding a parking place, attending classes, and then driving to Evanston to arrive home to try to do homework at 10:00 PM…and, the head of department decided that I was over-qualified for his program, since I wrote very clearly and learned PL/I too quickly. But there was no way we could live in Champaign-Urbana or Palo Alto, I thought.

    This was the era of the first microcomputers when there were fortunes to be made, and I was good with them since their software was based on mainframe software I’d learned in 1970. But when I wanted to attend Comdex 1977, where Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were announcing their products for the first time, my wife said that would be to abandon her in pregnancy. So I didn’t go. I’m not blaming her, since I was a grown up, and made my decision not to go.

    My former wife was reading a variety of books and magazines of the 1970s which told her that she could “have it all” and to demand her rights as a woman; paradoxically, but in a way that makes ultimate sense, those rights to be a strong, independent woman included the right to demand protection when expecting and as a mother. Of course, my explosive temper and many of my other defects were no help.

    The result? Children growing up without me who won’t contact me as adult men. Not pretty, as I’ve posted here. But my former wife is a decent person and never made any sex-linked accusations, and for my part, I had to grow up quickly after the divorce and I realized that I needed to support the kids and maintain contact with them, so we both acted decently.

    I realized that not only could I follow my dreams after the separation, but that I had to, so I took a job in Silicon Valley that helped me grow considerably in my profession. The cost was separation from the kids.

    Basically, we don’t want to be told, whether by corporations, advertisers or government, what pleases us. It is the Puritan’s strategy to recapture Pleasure and destroy it by making it into a grim duty. It would be fun to be married, to wake up on Saturday at ten to have sex and then coffee: but the latter Puritanism of Hollywood has turned these everyday scenes into a grim struggle to match the onscreen joy.

    I am sure you were and are a good father. Nearly all men are, and had you been guilty you wouldn’t be talking about it. One thing that is refreshing about our mutual online friend VAGB is how she demolishes the dark castle of licentious repression erected by Hollywood’s hegemony by making it ridiculous.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: